351–360 of 604 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You'd be surprised how many people on HN voted for this. A lot of people seem to only care about their stock portfolio, and Trump makes number go up.
[flagged]
I would like to live in less historical times. I'm a Finn.
Same, American. I don’t know why we got to be assholes. I prefer speaking softly and carrying a big stick.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And he's still no better off.
In what context? Personally? In rebuilding the Soviet Union? Or in the war?
This isn’t really about Greenland’s strategic value; it’s about the category error. You can trade goods, sign treaties, and negotiate basing rights. You can’t “buy” a people or their sovereignty especially when they don’t consent. That’s why Europe responds with process and principle: normalize coercion-as-bargaining among allies and you’re reviving a pre-1945 model of politics Europe built institutions to prevent. I…
I think Mexico should take back California. They need it, and I’m sure they appreciate it more.
I wonder how the current events in Greenland will impact the safety and sovereignty of Taiwan. The US is Taiwan’s most important military ally, even if that relationship remains unofficial. It is also the most critical power in the First Island Chain. If the US stopped being a global superpower, countries like Japan and South Korea might not be willing to aid in defending Taiwan on their own.
IMO, China will get back Taiwan without firing a single shot, the US is slowly de-risking itself from it and will eventually make Taiwan redundant. After seeing how the US is "helping" Ukraine, will the Taiwanese think fighting an all-out war with allies like this is worth it? China doesn't have the same genocidal intentions russia has towards Ukraine, so less reasons for people to fight it out Edt: would love some a…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The real message would be to pull out of the world cup.
World cup of what sport? If the message is to Trump, I assume golf?
(I'm talking about FIFA in case you are not aware)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The US used to have multiple military bases in Greenland during the Cold War. It has closed most of them and is down to one. It could, at any time, reopen them and move troops there under existing agreements, or build more. Nobody would bat an eyelid. To pretend this is about defence is nonsense. It’s about taking territory.
[flagged]
They were closed because the Cold War ended and they were no longer needed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder how the current events in Greenland will impact the safety and sovereignty of Taiwan. That was my thought as well. It's a dangerous rhetoric being displayed by USA. "We need this land for our security". Turns out, what if other powers start using the same rhetoric? Russia did it already for Ukraine, China might say "We need Taiwan for our security".. where does it stop and ultimately it leads absolutely nowh…
China already claims Taiwan, and has for decades; the only thing keeping it practically separate is uncertainty over the outcome in various dimensions if China tries to take it militarily. I don't think there's any doubt that if they were sure they could take it relatively bloodlessly and without significant repercussion, they would do so immediately.